CGI-Quality said:
Hynad said:
CGI-Quality said:
Now I really don't see what your point in this is, because that doesn't contradict what I've said in here. "Beautiful" and "best looking" are very different terms, and I didn't argue aginst Halo 4 being pegged as the "most beautiful game" (which it wasn't in the first place) >.<
My sole purpose for the intial quote was simple: the best from console doesn't top the best from PC, "aesthetic or otherwise". Don't know what I said in the past that has anything to do with this, as I've never argued against it; be it art, raw power, or anything else.
|
My point is that people come in and say that they view Halo 4 as better looking than any other games they've seen, PC included. And somehow, the "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" part of your former speech is replaced with how much more technically advanced PC games are. It's like saying a girl isn't as beautidul as an other because her boobs aren't as big. ¬_¬
Beauty is a matter of opinion. Not fact. If for you, beauty lies behind the tech side of things (resolution, frame-rate, ambiant occlusion, number of polygons on screen, etc...), then good for you. For other people, games like Flower may be the best looking game ever because for them beauty lies in that sort of artstyle, or mood conveyed visually, or whatever.
You bring PC tech talk into something that is nothing but subjective. Yeah, the tech part of your argument isn't subjective. But beauty is.
|
"This isn't up for dispute". The first sentence in the thread insinuates he sees it as a little more than opinion. Don't you find it interesting that I wasn't the only one to quote his part about PC?
If we were just talking beauty (read the edit in my last post), he wouldn't have been quoted the way he was. We could have misunderstood him, yes, that happens as human beings, but that's not how it came across.
|
It came accross to me as him saying it is his opinion and as such, isn't up for dispute. That was pretty clear to me. But yeah, like you said, we're humans.
